BillHicksScream

BillHicksScream t1_jd111ff wrote

Humans like to dream. Its part of what makes us great.

But Neil Postman was right. We are Amusing Ourselves To Death - and Space is just one thing that's pretty cool to dream about. https://youtube.com/watch?v=3G8a4Tdnab8

And I can see now how Musk + Co. are intentionally selling fake future dreams to avoid the expensive work of dealing with the looming negative ecological & social disorder.

−2

BillHicksScream t1_jczkunr wrote

No. Thats not how development works here. The list of problems for humans operating in Space has only increased. Nor has there been any required breakthrough in a new method of energy usage, something to escape orbit and move through space cheaply. You will notice there is no fusion/warp/new element powered minivans.

There is no huge demand to fuel development anyways. Unlike the airplane, whose development is fueled by four factors: a cheap, common energy source, WW 1+2, lots of commercial & governmental uses to pay for development and the #1 reason: Flying is possible. Birds exist.

But there are no alien spaceships, which would tell us Star Trek is possible.

−21

BillHicksScream t1_j8b67n8 wrote

They dont understand: Bush made terrorism much worse across the globe and we could not abandon people to a fate we created...during a global economic downturn that helped this happen.

There's an alternstive history where he does the same trip, but the angle is abandoning them to war and repression.

9

BillHicksScream t1_iwl3kol wrote

>However, if humanity were to harness all of Earth’s energy and become a Type I civilization on the Kardashev Scale, 

You cant "become" something that does not exist yet. Dreaming doesnt count as...anything. There's no such thing as a "Type 1 Civilisation", which is a really fucked, environmental nightmare to begin with.

5

BillHicksScream t1_itgdzjm wrote

That's just a metaphor for the the massive barriers and dangers of space. A hole in a sea ship vs a space ship? Huge difference.

If a ship starts slowly sinking just off shore, recovery of people & goods is easy. In Space its almost impossible.

1

BillHicksScream t1_itd5uaf wrote

Since most of it will be selling access to research & development programs, its still going to be government funded forever, not to mention paying for all the brains. The "industry" will be exploration & problem solving, maybe sell viles of moon dust. The number one outcome (edit: besides science knowledge) will be "Nope, does not work" since its mostly unknowns.

Hopefully this is just bad PR:

  • At ispace, we’ve turned our attention to the Moon. By taking advantage of lunar water resources, we can develop the space infrastructure needed to enrich our daily lives on earth, as well as expand our living sphere into space. Also, by making the Earth and Moon one system, a new economy with space infrastructure at its core will support human life, making sustainability a reality. This result is our ultimate goal, and our search for water on the Moon is the first step to achieving that goal.

Space is not Earth. None of the rules or examples apply. Think about any accident in Earth: cleanup & investigation is easier when we can just walk around and pick up the parts.

The wealth & development from The Age of Exploration was thanks to free & cheap resources with high survival rates. Fish, rainwater & air to breath abound, while wind + ocean power are free, a hole in the boat can be fixed & the man overboard! can swim.

But there is no "limping into port" in Space.

8